OK. Here is my take on profiles and USE.
First of all, the "default-linux/$arch/$relver" profiles will *always*
match what we use to build GRP for the releases. There's no discussion
here, as this will not be changed. Adding additional sub-profiles
really is a stupid idea and a waste of develop
On Monday, 26 December 2005 11:57 am, Jakub Moc wrote:
> emboss - "Adds support for the European Molecular Biology Open Software
> Suite." WTF? Why are we abusing make.defaults for such stuff?
Quote from bug #82428:
The reason why I think "emboss" should be enabled by default is that the
va
On Tue, Dec 27, 2005 at 12:10:04AM -0500, Chandler Carruth wrote:
> Brian Harring wrote:
>
> >On Mon, Dec 26, 2005 at 11:28:17PM -0500, Chandler Carruth wrote:
> >>3) there is _no_ functionality added by any of this, only
> >>"user-friendliness" after a fashion, and as such, perhaps it should all
Brian Harring wrote:
>On Mon, Dec 26, 2005 at 11:28:17PM -0500, Chandler Carruth wrote:
>
>
>>It occurs to me that this could be (to an extent) accomplished by having
>>a few more "specialized" subprofiles for x86: base, desktop, gnome, and kde.
>>
>>base - as the name implies, a _basic_ startin
On Mon, Dec 26, 2005 at 11:28:17PM -0500, Chandler Carruth wrote:
> It occurs to me that this could be (to an extent) accomplished by having
> a few more "specialized" subprofiles for x86: base, desktop, gnome, and kde.
>
> base - as the name implies, a _basic_ starting point... very similar to
>
Lares Moreau wrote:
>On Mon, 2005-12-26 at 12:36 -0600, Joe McCann wrote:
>
>
>>For the record, the eds flag was
>>added as a default flag because every 3rd gnome user would file bugs or
>>complain via forums because they installed gnome, found no
>>evolution-data-server integration, and then be
Lares Moreau wrote:
I'm relatively ignorant of USE Flag intricacies, so please forgive me if
things don't 'fit'.
Ditto for me. I have a question or two. I have servers that have no
GUI at all. I just use them to run folding on. Would I benefit from
puting in USE="-*" in my USE line?
Lares Moreau wrote:
On Mon, 2005-12-26 at 12:36 -0600, Joe McCann wrote:
For the record, the eds flag was
added as a default flag because every 3rd gnome user would file bugs or
complain via forums because they installed gnome, found no
evolution-data-server integration, and then be bummed w
On Mon, 26 Dec 2005 15:19:47 -0700 Lares Moreau
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| Is it feasible and or useful to have a 'meta-flag' that that enables
| all the 'necessary' USE flags for a given group of packages? So
| something like USE='meta-'.
USE flags are for things that're optional, not things
On Monday 26 December 2005 20:24, Jakub Moc wrote:
> exactly the same thing with motif - would
> someone explain why the heck do do we need this thing in make.defaults?
Because people emerges xpdf waiting for xpdf binary and they won't find it
with -motif, as it requires motif integration, but I t
OK, so because every 3rd gnome user is not able to add the proper use flag
to make.conf, every non-gnome user is stuck with investigating and putting
-eds into make.conf to avoid pulling in gnome crap. Wonderful.
Yes, I am ranting, because this kind of use flags basically pulls in huge
number or
On Mon, 26 Dec 2005 20:03:42 +0100 Carsten Lohrke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
| On Monday 26 December 2005 18:07, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
| > Because it makes sense. For any application which has IUSE="emboss",
| > chances are emboss should be enabled. There was a long discussion
| > about this on th
On Monday 26 December 2005 18:07, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> Because it makes sense. For any application which has IUSE="emboss",
> chances are emboss should be enabled. There was a long discussion about
> this on the -user list a while back where I ended up posting a
> newbie-friendly explanation of
On Monday 26 December 2005 19:36, Joe McCann wrote:
> This whole thread seems to have come from a
> misunderstanding of how use.defaults work and 20 min of boredom.
use.defaults are based on the idea that having an ebuild installed should
activate the relevant use flag(s) behind the users back.
Simon Stelling wrote:
> Doug Goldstein wrote:
>
>> the USE defaults are a bit INSANE... We need to get rid of some of this
>> crap...
>>
>>
>> ./default-linux/x86/2005.0/make.defaults:USE="alsa apm arts avi berkdb
>> bitmap-fo nts crypt cups eds emboss encode fortran foomaticdb gdbm gif
>> gnome g
Petteri Räty wrote:
Bastiaan Visser wrote:
On Monday 26 December 2005 09:33, Mike Frysinger wrote:
On Monday 26 December 2005 02:24, Doug Goldstein wrote:
well there is always USE enabling... (i.e. When I emerge x11-libs/qt,
it'll turn on the "qt" USE flag)
which we
Doug Goldstein wrote:
the USE defaults are a bit INSANE... We need to get rid of some of this
crap...
./default-linux/x86/2005.0/make.defaults:USE="alsa apm arts avi berkdb
bitmap-fo nts crypt cups eds emboss encode fortran foomaticdb gdbm gif
gnome gpm gstreamer gtk gtk2 imlib ipv6 jpeg kde l
On Mon, 26 Dec 2005 17:57:17 +0100 Jakub Moc <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| alsa - this does not make most sense definitely, this horrible thing
| needs to die.
Why? On x86, alsa is the least broken sound system, and on x86, the
target for the default profiles is desktops, and most desktops have
sou
On Monday 26 December 2005 17:32, Jan Kundrát wrote:
> If it should be on by default, let's add it to the profile, don't ask
> users to turn it on themselves.
That s what it s done now. But -* would disable it...
--
Diego "Flameeyes" Pettenò - http://dev.gentoo.org/~flameeyes/
Gentoo/ALT lead, Ge
Petteri Räty wrote:
>>aint it worth it to mention "-*" in the handbook ?
If you make a decision, http://bugs.gentoo.org/ please.
> And then mentioning stuff like pam that almost everyone wants? There are
> also things that should be on by default.
If it should be on by default, let's add it to t
Dale wrote:
> I'm not a dev but I can see both sides. I learned why some things are
> being pulled in that I couldn't figure out. I use KDE but do not want
> Gnome and it appears that I have some gnome stuff installed and didn't
> know it, because of the USE line. I guess they are in there becau
On Mon, 26 Dec 2005 00:09:57 -0500 Doug Goldstein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
| the USE defaults are a bit INSANE... We need to get rid of some of
| this crap...
No, you just don't understand how they work. It's not an issue of
"is foo important". It's an issue of "for packages with optional foo
su
Bastiaan Visser wrote:
> On Monday 26 December 2005 09:33, Mike Frysinger wrote:
>
>>On Monday 26 December 2005 02:24, Doug Goldstein wrote:
>>
>>>well there is always USE enabling... (i.e. When I emerge x11-libs/qt,
>>>it'll turn on the "qt" USE flag)
>>
>>which we've already established quite cl
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Doug,
Doug Goldstein schrieb:
|>>the USE defaults are a bit INSANE... We need to get rid of some of this
|>>crap...
Buzzwords like "Stupid,INSANE,crap,bitching" beside: There are projects
which need these combinations of USE flags like Releng. They a
Doug Goldstein wrote:
the USE defaults are a bit INSANE... We need to get rid of some of this
crap...
./default-linux/x86/2005.0/make.defaults:USE="alsa apm arts avi berkdb
bitmap-fo nts crypt cups eds emboss encode fortran foomaticdb gdbm gif
gnome gpm gstreamer gtk gtk2 imlib ipv6 jpeg kde l
On Monday 26 December 2005 09:33, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Monday 26 December 2005 02:24, Doug Goldstein wrote:
> > well there is always USE enabling... (i.e. When I emerge x11-libs/qt,
> > it'll turn on the "qt" USE flag)
>
> which we've already established quite clearly as something we wish to
On Monday 26 December 2005 02:24, Doug Goldstein wrote:
> well there is always USE enabling... (i.e. When I emerge x11-libs/qt,
> it'll turn on the "qt" USE flag)
which we've already established quite clearly as something we wish to get rid
of completely
-mike
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing li
Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Monday 26 December 2005 00:09, Doug Goldstein wrote:
>
>>the USE defaults are a bit INSANE... We need to get rid of some of this
>>crap...
>
>
> not really a useful endeavor unless we get something like per-package USE
> defaults
>
> everyone has their own opinion as
Mike Frysinger wrote:
On Monday 26 December 2005 00:09, Doug Goldstein wrote:
the USE defaults are a bit INSANE... We need to get rid of some of this
crap...
not really a useful endeavor unless we get something like per-package USE
defaults
everyone has their own opinion as to what
On Monday 26 December 2005 00:09, Doug Goldstein wrote:
> the USE defaults are a bit INSANE... We need to get rid of some of this
> crap...
not really a useful endeavor unless we get something like per-package USE
defaults
everyone has their own opinion as to what a 'good' or 'sane' default is a
30 matches
Mail list logo
